ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)
Validating remote cognitive tests in the Wisconsin Registry for Alzheimer's Prevention.
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gut bacterial metabolite imidazole propionate potentiates Alzheimer's disease pathology.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Validating remote cognitive tests in the Wisconsin Registry for Alzheimer's Prevention.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionRemote cognitive assessment addresses barriers to research participation for older participants, but continuity in longitudinal studies is a challenge. We examined whether scores from telephone-based assessments (T-COG) were valid and reliable estimates of in-person traditional neuropsychological findings.
methodsParticipants in the Wisconsin Registry for Alzheimer's Prevention (WRAP) who had completed in-person testing within the prior 12 months were invited to complete a follow-up T-COG visit. Bland-Altman plots and intraclass correlations were used to assess repeatability and bias.
resultsCorrelations between in-person and T-COG scores were of moderate to large magnitude (Pearson DISCUSSION: The WRAP-abbreviated T-COG battery can be completed in less than an hour and shows good concordance with in-person test administration. Availability of the T-COG option may reduce missing data and/or enhance retention when obstacles to in-person attendance arise. Highlights: Remote testing had adequate validity compared to in-person assessment.A telephone preclinical Alzheimer's composite correlated well with the original.Remote options may reduce missing data when barriers exist to in-person testing.Teleassessment may facilitate participant recruitment and retention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.